skip navigation
Here's how you know US flag signifying that this is a United States Federal Government website

An official website of the United States government

Here's how you know

Dot gov

Official websites use .gov
A .gov website belongs to an official government organization in the United States.

SSL

Secure .gov websites use HTTPS
A lock ( ) or https:// means you've safely connected to the .gov website. Share sensitive information only on official, secure websites.

Federal Election Commission | United States of America
  • Press Release

Compliance Cases Made Public

January 28, 2000


 

For Immediate Release:                                                                                             Contact:   Kelly Huff
January 28, 2000                                                                                                                           Ron Harris
                                                                                                                                                        Sharon Snyder
                                                                                                                                                        Ian Stirton



 


 


 


COMPLIANCE CASES MADE PUBLIC


WASHINGTON -- The Federal Election Commission has recently made public its final action on three matters previously under review (MURs). This release contains only summary information. Closed files should be thoroughly read for details, including the FEC’s legal analysis of the case. (See footnote at the end of this release.) Closed MUR files are available in the Public Records Office.


1.	MUR 2314 


														RESPONDENTS: (a) National Republican Senatorial Committee (NRSC), James L. Hagen, treasurer (DC)



    

  • (b) Republican National Committee, William J. McManus, treasurer (DC)
    • 

  • © James D. Santini (NV)
    • 

  • (d) Jim Santini for Senate, J. Glen Sanford, treasurer (NV)		



	COMPLAINANT: Richard Segerblom, Esq. (NV)		


	SUBJECT:	Excessive contributions; failure to properly report and accurately
account for earmarked contributions


DISPOSITION: (a) Probable cause to believe [3/10/92], litigation initiated [1/12/93]*


[re: excessive contributions resulting from exercise of direction and control over contributions; failure to report earmarked
contributions transmitted to Jim Santini for Senate through the NRSC’s 1986 Direct-To operation as contributions from the NRSC;
failure to report earmarked contributions transmitted to Jim Santini for Senate by means of NRSC checks through the
committee’s Majority ’86 operation as contributions from the NRSC; failure to report as contributions to Jim Santini for Senate
unreimbursed costs related to solicitations for the NRSC’s 1986 Direct-To, Direct -To Auto and Majority ‘86 programs, but not
including the unsuccessful costs of general party fundraising in programs where the contributors were called back for
redesignations]


-Final Judgment: June 12, 1995 - The National Republican Senatorial Committee violated 2 U.S.C.  
§ 441a(h) and 434(b) of the FECA by directing the redesignation of contributions it
received and by failing to properly report this activity. The FEC was precluded from collecting civil penalties in this case because
in a February 24, 1995, decision, the court ruled that the 5-year statute of limitations had expired. Furthermore, the NRSC agreed
that through December 31, 1998, it would report all contributions that it asks contributors to redesignate to candidates as
contributions from both itself and the contributor.

			Reason to believe, but took no further action*


			[re: failure to report as contributions to Jim Santini for Senate any 				unreimbursed costs related to solicitations for the trust and 				miscellaneous conduit operations]


			No reason to believe*


			[re: failure to properly report conduit contributions]








(b) No reason to believe


[re: excessive contributions resulting from exercise of direction 	and control over contributions; failure to properly report and 	accurately account for earmarked contributions]


(c) No reason to believe*


[re: excessive contributions resulting from exercise of direction 	and control over contributions; failure to properly report and 	accurately account for earmarked contributions]


(d) Reason to believe, but took no further action*



	[re: excessive contributions resulting from exercise of direction 	and control over contributions; failure to report NRSC as 	contributor of conduit contributions; failure to report all 	contributions received through NRSC; failure to report solicitation 	costs from NRSC Direct-To program as contributions from NRSC]


	No reason to believe*


	[re: failure to report conduit of contributions]







2.	MUR 4250 


														RESPONDENTS: (a) Republican National Committee, Alec Pointevint, treasurer (DC)










(b) Haley R. Barbour, (former) Chairman, Republican National Committee (DC)


© National Policy Forum (NPF) and John R. Bolton, President (DC)










	COMPLAINANT: Democratic National Committee, Joseph E. Sandler, General 


		Counsel (DC)


	SUBJECT:	Conducting allocable activity through NPF; failure to report
activity conducted through NPF; failure to properly allocate federal and non-federal shares of activity conducted through NPF;
financing federal share of activity conducted through NPF with prohibited corporate and excessive contributions; solicitation and receipt
of foreign national funds


	DISPOSITION:	(a) Failure to find reason to believe*







	[re: conducting allocable activity through NPF; failure to report 	activity conducted through NPF; failure to properly allocate federal 	and non-federal shares of activity conducted through NPF; financing 	federal share of activity conducted through NPF with prohibited 	corporate and excessive contributions]


	Reason to believe, failure to find probable cause to believe*


	[re: solicitation and receipt of foreign national funds]


(b)	Reason to believe, failure to find probable cause to believe*


	[re: solicitation and receipt of foreign national funds]


© Took no action*







3.	MUR 4884/Pre-MUR 358


	


	RESPONDENTS:	(a) Future Tech International, Inc. (FL) 


(b) Juan M. Ortiz, CFO, Future Tech International, Inc. (FL)


© Louis Leonardo, President, Future Tech International, Inc. (FL)


(d) Leonard Keller, Secretary and Director, Future Tech International, Inc. (FL)


(e) Gregorio P. Narvasa, Treasurer. Future Tech International, Inc. (FL)


(f) Howard Glicken (FL)


(g) Mark Vision Holdings, Inc. (Br. V.I. & FL)


(h) MarkVision Computers, Inc. (FL)


(i) Marvin Rosen (FL)


(j) Greenberg, Traurig, Hoffman, Lipoff, Rosen & Quentel, P.A. (FL)


(k) Charles "Bud" Stack (FL)


(l) High, Stack, Lazenby, Pallahach, Goldsmith & Del Amo (FL)


(m) Lidia Azambuja (FL)                                        
(z) Manual Garcia (FL)


(n) Ernesto Bonfante (FL)                                        
(aa) William Gearhart (FL)


(o) Marcelino Brotonel (FL)                                    
(bb) Luz Gonzales (FL)


(p) Edgar Crespo (FL)                                                
(cc) Daria Haycox (FL)


(q) Marcel Crespo (FL)                                                
(dd) Marcia Juan (FL)


® Reynaldo Crespo (FL)                                            
(ee) Michael Marchese (FL)


(s) Ricardo Crespo (FL)                                                
(ff) Robert Nowell (FL)


(t) Jacob Del Valle (FL)                                                
(gg) Maria C. Ortiz (FL)


(u) Raymund dos Remedios (FL)                                
(hh) Ruth Ramirez (FL)


(v) Rene dos Remedios (FL)                                        
(ii) Juan Ruiz (FL) 


(w) Richard Esparragoza (FL)                                        
(jj) Rolan Sacramento (FL)


(x) Jorge O. Fenton (FL)                                                    
(kk) Enrique Sanchez (FL)


(y) David Fried (FL)                                                        
(ll) Jennifer C. Seijas (FL)


	COMPLAINANT: Sua sponte


	SUBJECT:	Corporate contributions; foreign national contributions; contributions
in the names of others


	DISPOSITION:	(a-e) Conciliation Agreement: $209,000*


			 [some findings knowing and willful]


		(f) Reason to believe, but took no further action*


			 [re: corporate contributions; contributions in the names of others]


		(g-h) Reason to believe, but took no further action*


			 [re: knowing and willful contributions in the names of others]






(h) Reason to believe, but took no further action*



	 [re: knowing and willful corporate contributions]







		(i-l) Reason to believe, but took no further action*		


			 [re: foreign national contributions]


		(m-ll) Reason to believe, but took no further action*


			 [re: contributions in the names of others]	


 


*There are four administrative stages to the FEC enforcement process:


1. Receipt of proper complaint                               
3. "Probable cause" stage


2. "Reason to believe" stage                                    
4. Conciliation stage


It requires the votes of at least four of the six Commissioners to take any action. The FEC can close a case at any point after reviewing a complaint. If a violation is found and conciliation cannot be reached, then the FEC can institute a civil court action against a respondent.


# # #

Read next:

FEC Announces Departure of Acting General Counsel Daniel A. Petalas

More press releases »

This information is not intended to replace the law or to change its meaning, nor does this information create or confer any rights for or on any person or bind the Federal Election Commission or the public.

The reader is encouraged also to consult the Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971, as amended (52 U.S.C. 30101 et seq.), Commission regulations (Title 11 of the Code of Federal Regulations), Commission advisory opinions and applicable court decisions.